[ad_1]
In big battleground states, many intraparty divisions get papered over in service of forming a united front to beat the opposition. But in a one-party town like D.C., all the really juicy fights happen when Democrats duke it out among themselves.
Loose Lips hears that’s exactly what’s been going on within the D.C. Democratic Party these days. This particular round of fighting kicked off when party leaders decided to file a legal challenge to Initiative 83, the ballot measure that could bring ranked choice voting and open primaries to local elections. But several activists tell LL the internal debate has since expanded to cover fundamental questions of how the organization is run. Many say dissatisfaction with party chair Charles Wilson has been building for some time, and the I83 issue brought things to a head after Wilson decided to challenge the initiative without consulting his colleagues first.
“The inclusivity has just gone out the window, and it just feels like it’s closing off more and more,” says Elizabeth Mitchell, who represents Ward 3 as an elected Democratic state committeewoman, one of more than 80 leaders that govern the party. She joined her other three ward committee members in writing a widely circulated letter to Wilson outlining some of these complaints on Sept. 6.
“It’s reverting back to many of the same bad behaviors that we were seeing under Anita [Bonds] to the point that, even with this last election cycle, I think a lot of us really weren’t even sure if we were going to run again,” Mitchell adds, referencing the at-large councilmember who previously led the party for years and faced similar complaints about her leadership.
It may be easy to dismiss some of this grumbling when it comes from ranked choice voting supporters, such as Mitchell, who are upset that Wilson has led the party in fighting so aggressively against the idea these past few years. But LL has heard concerns from even those party members who are more ambivalent about the ballot initiative; some ardent RCV backers don’t believe it’s wise to package the measure with open primaries, for instance, but they still feel Wilson should’ve asked for their input before proceeding with the legal action.
“There are a lot of leaders on the [party’s] executive committee who were left out of the decision-making process and did not feel heard,” says Candace Tiana Nelson, the chair of the Ward 4 Democrats and head of the party’s Black caucus. She’s also the influential “chair of chairs,” representing all the ward chairs in party leadership. “And it could be perceived as a pattern of sorts of having leaders being left out of decision making when it comes to the party,” Nelson adds.
Wilson downplayed the severity of these divisions in an interview with LL, arguing that this kind of dispute “comes with the territory” when leading a large organization like the D.C. Dems. He notes that he’s met with Mitchell and the other Ward 3 committee members to hear them out and he “always appreciates their feedback.”
“Intraparty conflict in political parties is nothing that’s uncommon,” Wilson says. “That’s what makes the D.C. Democratic Party great, it’s that diversity of thought. And we look forward to having these conversations over the next couple of months to see what’s appropriate for the party at the end of this.”
But many local activists are skeptical about the possibility for real change. For a closer look inside the debate roiling local Democrats, check out our full story online.
—Alex Koma (tips? akoma@washingtoncitypaper.com)
[ad_2]
Source link
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings